Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(helm): add extra object option #4664

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Oct 9, 2023

Conversation

haarchri
Copy link
Contributor

Description of your changes

  • add extraObjects: [] in helm-chart
    Sometimes, accessory to the installation there may be manifest to be installed (for example ControllerConfig, Providers, PodMonitor ...)

Test

helm list -aA
NAME            NAMESPACE               REVISION        UPDATED                                 STATUS          CHART                   APP VERSION
crossplane      crossplane-system       1               2023-09-22 15:34:37.140885 +0200 CEST   deployed        crossplane-0.0.1        1.13.1     
kubectl get pods -n crossplane-system
NAME                                      READY   STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
crossplane-5c9d689b67-5rczf               1/1     Running   0          4m15s
crossplane-rbac-manager-6865d6d7f-lqlkm   1/1     Running   0          4m15s
kubectl get controllerconfig
NAME         AGE
aws-config   4m13s

Fixes #

I have:

  • Read and followed Crossplane's contribution process.
  • Added or updated unit and E2E tests for my change.
  • Run make reviewable to ensure this PR is ready for review.
  • Added backport release-x.y labels to auto-backport this PR, if necessary.
  • Opened a PR updating the docs, if necessary.

Signed-off-by: Christopher Haar <christopher.haar@upbound.io>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Haar <christopher.haar@upbound.io>
Copy link
Contributor

@phisco phisco left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not a huge fan of this approach as it feels a bit like scope creep. You should probably wrap this chart in another chart, deploying what you need with all the additional resources, but I understand that's more work. Overall, I don't see any harm in adding this; it's a pretty common pattern.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants